…
But the situation is more delicate for those who gained their notoriety, made their reputations, and received their government funding on the old “sky is falling” model. For them acknowledging new facts means admitting the major possibility they were wrong. This includes conceding policy prescriptions based on their work may be draconian, counterproductive, and in the end vastly harmful to poorest of the world’s population. The ethanol disaster is but one example of “consensus” science taking food off the table for no discernible reason. These admissions would be a tough pill to swallow but ones a true scientist would embrace.
Watchdog.org reports:
Virginia gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe and three top GreenTech advisers met with the key White House aide responsible for helping bankrupt solar-panel maker Solyndra win federal loans and high-profile presidential support, a Watchdog investigation has revealed.
What they discussed in the Oct. 12, 2010, meeting with Obama “green energy” aide Greg Nelson is a mystery – the White House visitors log offers no details. But the confab came seven months after a stock transfer made McAuliffe a GreenTech majority owner and company chairman.
h/t to Junkscience.com
Forget the Solyndra connection–it pales in comparison to the movie “Fast Terry” recently put out by Citizens United http://fastterry.com/
Mikey is going to run out of lawyers if this type of calling out continues.
But he can’t sue everyone and time is not on his side.
What an article by the Daily Caller! That was a great read. Now I should get the popcorn and wait for the reaction. It’s gonna be loud from M.M. It always is. What’s the betting he’ll sue?
Cuccinelli is getting hammered on VA TV ads for helping nat. gas companies rape landowners. As a new resident to the commonwealth, I do not look forward to November.
…but, why would anyone call Mann a charlatan?
(end sarc)
Ouch. I wonder how he will weather this storm? No doubt he has a model tucked away somewhere to explain it all to his followers. Mann made economic disaster anyone?
Green business is fast becomming a loophole for drug cartels and crime syndicates to gain high level political influence, and launder dirty money.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22017112
We haven’t seen the last of green links to organised crime.
lol the author is a lawyer too… he must not have much belief mann is going to win his case against steyn.
MattN said:
Yes, it’s because billionaire environmentalist Tom Steyer who heavily funds anti-Keystone XL groups is now heavily funding Democrat Terry McAuliffe against Cuccinelli.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/tom-steyer-terry-mcauliffe-virginia-governor-race-95174.html#ixzz2bKTDlBvO
Can someone please set out the ‘progress’ of Piltdown Mann’s various efforts at litigation.
Apparently Mann is trying to hide the decline in support for McAuliffe…
Someone please send Cucinelli some info about Mann’s past indiscretions (claiming to be a Nobel laureate, hockey stick etc.) to use as ammo in h campaign.
Was the lawsuit at UVA the one where Mann hid behind a former big tobacco defense attorney?
arthur4563 says:
August 7, 2013 at 4:47 pm
Cuccinelli probably knows a lot about Mann from his efforts to get his UVA emails.
Lol, David Appell is over in the comments arguing that we should be in the midst of the Little Ice Age! Does he not realize the “consensus” says we left the Little Ice Age long before anthropogenic GHG emissions were of significance?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/mcauliffe-cuccinelli-race-drips-with-venom/2013/08/06/e7dadc78-fae5-11e2-9bde-7ddaa186b751_story.html
Democrat ads call Cuccinelli’s Mann e-mail suit a “witch hunt”.
Actually, the best part of this is “Paul H. Jossey, Lawyer”
The guy is calling Mann out, daring him to sue. Hahah.
kcrucible says:
August 7, 2013 at 4:59 pm
Actually, the best part of this is “Paul H. Jossey, Lawyer”
The guy is calling Mann out, daring him to sue. Hahah.
—–
More likely this is Paul H. Jossey’s calling card for getting on the Steyn/CEI team. Did you see he specializes in First Amendment and Environmental Policy? His twitterings say that he just got his District of Columbia license last month. This article is just flying his colors.
Going to be interesting…
A testable hypothesis: AGU Fellow Michael E. Mann is to charlatanism as his fellow AGU honored associate Peter H. Gleick is to fraud?
But I am being unfair to Glieck by the implication that his activities are even close to being as questionable as Mann’s.
John
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlatan
“A charlatan (also called swindler or mountebank) is a person practicing quackery or some similar confidence trick in order to obtain money, fame or other advantages via some form of pretense or deception.”
Hide the decline?
Funny, I have been thinking, just to myself, that the term, “Charlatan” may just apply to many climate – alarmist pseudo-scientists. While skeptics have of late resorted to referring to the true believers of Man-Made-Themageddon on Earth as a kind of religion impenetrable by observable facts and logic; perhaps alarmist-scientists are simply clever, quite clever charlatans, mountebanks, and con-artists. Cynical phoneys only in it for the money.
If that ends up being the case, how funny would that be! They were quite clever; making fools of everyone and stuffing their pockets with public moneys!
That pop you heard was Mann’s ego going off again , so we can ‘look forward ‘ to another court case . Perhaps this time he will go to far to back out or bail out , if we are lucky.
The “Fast Terry” half hour is sad, sad. There was a time when the likes of McAuliffe would be sent out of town on a rail, tarred and feathered. Now, he will, likely, be Virginia’s next governor. He has zero qualifications, except, money, illegal (?) and partnership with Hillary Clinton’s fat brother, Tony, in the “investment business.”
I like much of Cuccinelli’s work, on Obamacare, against EPA silliness, his fight for sunlight on the Michael Mann UVA mess. But, I cannot abide his feeling that he has the right to force all women at all times to birth because of *his* religious beliefs. When the Virginia Board of Health said, in effect, that the new regulations imposed upon abortion clinics (for the sake of women’s health…. wink, wink) should not apply to existing clinics, Cuccinelli threatened them: *If* somebody got “hurt” in a clinic (wink, wink) I don’t think the Va Atty General would defend you. ……GRIN…….. they caved.
I suppose I should be grateful Cuccinelli doesn’t believe cows are sacred.
I’m voting Libertarian: Robert Sarvis.
It will probably elect McAuliffe. If so, Virginians are too stupid to know what’s good for them. No harm; no foul. …..Lady in Red
The Antarctic sea ice is the highest in recorded history. The warmists need to start planning for a way out. It appears the planet is starting to cool, in response to the solar cycle 24 change which will disprove their hypothesis.
Scientists make tentative statements and acknowledge anomalies when observations indicate there are fundamental problems with their hypothesis/hypotheses. Advocates on the other hand work independent of science and logic. Advocates call those who point out logical and observational anomalies ‘deniers’.
It is difficult to imagine how the climate wars will adjust to global cooling. It appears there will appropriately be job losses, particularly if there is a change in government.
http://joannenova.com.au/
http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/graphs/antarctic/antarctic-cea-ice-aug-4-2013.gif
You remember that saying “‘Tis better to say nothing and be thought an idiot, than say something and everyone knows you are an idiot..” something like that.
Ummm….Mikey, don’t look now, but Virginia is ranked Number 12 in coal production according to the National Mining Association, politicians shouldn’t bite the hand that feeds them etc.
http://www.nma.org/pdf/c_production_state_rank.pdf
Time to start the betting pool on how many hours until he threatens to sue!! Get the popcorn…
Lady in Red says:
August 7, 2013 at 5:54 pm
The Obama Machine’s plan is to strip off otherwise conservative women to vote for them or stay home or vote for hopeless third party candidates by waving the bloody banner of abortion.
But with Roe against Wade the law of the land, there is very little that a state governor can do. Even in Texas, going from 24 to 20 weeks, favored by most Americans, was a struggle. So IMO realistically there is very little that Cuccinelli could do to change VA abortion law.
Is this issue really so important to you that you’re willing to help elect the egregiously corrupt, slimy Democrat operative TM to the highest office in your great state?
Lady in Red: I keep hoping that the GOP will one day realize that their backing of candidates that insist on forcing their religion down other’s throats is no better than the Taliban, and no more deserving of any thinking person’s vote. If they would rein this particular stupidity in, they would own the government for the next 50 years.
Philip Peake says:
August 7, 2013 at 6:35 pm
It’s not the GOP, but a segment of its base that is as extreme as its Indiana & Missouri Senate candidates in 2012. The latter was chosen in a three-way race.
Romney & McCain, both moderate to liberal on abortion, won the nomination. It’s wrong to tar the whole party on the basis of its fringe, IMO. There’s little that a president or senator can do to change the law as interpreted by judges. Despite many GOP appointees on the USSC, the Roe decision hasn’t been overturned.
IMO it should be, not because abortion should be outlawed in all cases, but because the definition of murder should be left up to the states. Roe was legislation for the whole country by five appointed officials, not jurisprudence. Even Ginsburg now recognizes that it would have been better to leave abortion policy to the states. No girl or woman would ever be more than a short bus ride from a state in which abortion was legal to nine months, but citizens who consider it murder even at less than five months then would not have to pay for the procedure.
Philip Peake, you are right. This Cuccinelli guy could win this election EASY, any Republican in Virginia can. Against McAuliff there really shouldn’t be any problems at all. But the GOP is obsessed with running dumb candidates who turn off so many people. The liberals don’t win because the people want MORE liberal policies, the liberals win because the Republicans run the most wretched candidates and then we get those liberal policies anyway.
milo, it’s not really about abortion as a whole. I think the partial birth abortion issue is one the GOP could win. it’s the cutesy dishonest way they go about it. Not much different from the global warming alarmists. If you want to have an honest debate, have it. Be upfront. Say what you just said. But the GOP, especially in Virginia, always do these runarounds of the truth that hurt them in the end.
Philip Peake says:
August 7, 2013 at 6:35 pm
Lady in Red: I keep hoping that the GOP will one day realize that their backing of candidates that insist on forcing their religion down other’s throats is no better than the Taliban, and no more deserving of any thinking person’s vote. If they would rein this particular stupidity in, they would own the government for the next 50 years.
==========================
Exactly. They fall for the fake-left wing tricks every time:
Fake left wing: We’ve got gay marriage, whooo hooo
Republicans: Screw you, we’ve got abortion, ner ner ne ner ner
Wake up – it’s 2013, not 1913
Re: Lady in Red says August 7, 2013 at 5:54 pm
If I may say, a little short-sighted and presumptuous on your part? Of ALL the options available, and I mean ALL the options (re contra .. tives), to focus on that which is the latest in term and last as well, is, short-sighted!
Respectfully submitted, of course.
.
Jorge says:
August 7, 2013 at 6:44 pm
The execrable candidates in some recent elections have been chosen in primaries dominated by Tea Party activists, with sabotaging Democrat cross-over voters thrown in for good measure, then bogus third party stalking horses in the general. The Tea Party started out as an economic protest movement, but got hijacked by social conservatives.
The GOP would control the Senate right now but for bad candidates in DE, CO & NV in 2010 & IN & MO in 2012, plus the Democrats’ backing a third party candidate in MT & pouring money into ND, while Romney idiotically blew the get out the vote ground game.
But what can you do with a primary system instead of party bosses picking the most electable candidates?
Not to mention massive vote fraud in OH, VA & FL, admitted to by the participants but not prosecuted by Holder.
To be fair Philip, there’s plenty of “religion” being forced down throats by Dems. It’s just not the Judeo-Christian-Muslim-etc variety. You’ve got Reverend Al Gore, for example. And those that preach about the “97%,” more extreme weather events, etc, the sorts of things that the unwitting take on faith.
And while the exact figure depends on which study you go by, roughly 75% of the US population identifies themselves as Christian. Exactly how would dropping traditional Christian values in politics improve the election chances of GOP politicians?
Jorge says:
August 7, 2013 at 6:47 pm
You may know more about the situation in VA than I. Even if the sneakiness level is as high as you suggest, may I respectfully ask, so what?
The fact remains that abortion law can’t be changed in VA or any other state without the legislature, so the governor is only one part of the equation. If the voters return a legislature willing to make the narrow kinds of changes allowed under federal constitutional proscription, then that is their will & so be it. Restricting infanticide & maintaining clinics healthy for the women who seek treatment there are well within state purview, IMO.
But the changes that any state can make are severely constrained by Roe.
My point is that with so many other important issues at stake, why vote based upon this one issue over which a governor has so little control in any case?
Phillip Peake…. Oh! how I agree. Beyond the GOP, conservatives, Constitutionalists — folk who believe in fact, science, truth! — could own the gov’t, I suspect. But, the fact that the McAuliffe/Mann clowns have made it as far as they have — that Obama can still pontificate about saving the world’s climate and have millions and millions of folk believe he’s Christ, or somesuch — is a sign of where the country is.
I ask friends to read WUWT, Climate Audit, Judith Curry and I’m met with a snarky, “Let’s just agree to disagree and leave it to the experts.” These minds will not save America.
And, looming over the horizon, is the American Taliban-like mentality which believes that their personal beliefs about the world, life and women (as forced incubating ovens) should be the law of the land. They are very self-righteous.
Long ago, I voted for Ross Perot. And believed. Perhaps, one day soon, a Libertarian will win. In any event, the Libertarian candidate in Virginia is the smartest and the most politically pure. That’s reason enough to shake up the mix. I am not ashamed of the vote to be. I even sent money. …..Lady in Red
Lady in Red says:
August 7, 2013 at 7:08 pm
Your vote for Perot gave us the Clintons.
Perot made a corrupt bargain with Clinton that he would get back into the race & throw it to Clinton in exchange for the government buying software from him when Hillary’s health care system was adopted. Oops! That didn’t pan out for Perot, but saddled the US with the most corrupt power couple in US history.
Libertarian candidates elect Democrats, as in the MT senate race. Why not just vote for Terry? The practical effect is the same. “Shaking up the mix” is exactly what the Democrats want you to think you’re doing.
The Obama administration brilliantly picked a fight with the Catholic Church on purpose in order to convince voters like you to support them. Tar the GOP’s extreme base with the brush of religious fundamentalism but please recognize that your buying into that ploy opens the door to the the Democrats’ extreme socialist base.
Practically there is little that social conservatives can do. Interestingly, what both radical pro-abortion & anti-abortion activists agree is that the issue should be nationalized. Both sides want victory at the federal level, rather than having to fight it out in the states. Moderates prefer that the USSC had not co-opted the issue, finding justification in “emanations from the penumbra” of one of the Bill of Rights.
The saying goes, it is better to remain silent and be thought an idiot than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt.
The abstract above says “made McAuliffe a GreenTech majority owner and company chairman”, but the linked article says “made McAuliffe a GreenTech minority owner and company chairman”. So which is it?
Two thoughts:
1) Both the political left and right play the same games:
On climate, we don’t want to do anything more than, simply, be good stewards of our planet earth, preserve it for our grandchildren….
On guns, we don’t want to take away everyone’s guns, we just want to make guns safe, protect children, etc. etc.
And, on abortion, we don’t want to force women to birth against their will, we just don’t want an innocent little fetus to suffer pain, etc.
It is the “how many hairs make a beard” argument, all ’round. The movement is incremental, but the end objective is always there. Not pretty. Absolute.
2) I crave smart, thinking people to advance candidates with sensible positions on climate, taxes, immigration, foreign policy, etc. and whose personal religious beliefs about abortion and homosexuality are not a thumping back-beat to their political refrain. Sadly, I have never been to a candidate’s night for conservatives, tea party folk, etc. where the stealth issue (regardless the immediate unliklihood of turning women into burka-wearing incubators) was not forced birthing, above all others. That is sad. And scary. It’s, still, far out on the horizon, but it doesn’t bode well at the other end of the spectrum of the progressive’s non-thinking agenda. ….Lady in Red
Perhaps it is time you guys scrapped your current system and tried democracy. Hint for the clueless: They had elections in East Germany and the USSR too. Democracy requires more than meaningless elections.
milodonharlani… The question, perhaps, reduces to:
Would I prefer to face a firing squad of fascists or communists? (I’ve actually thought about that.)
I don’t reckon it makes much difference.
I am not ashamed of thinking, caring, advocating. In time, truth will out itself, altho the truth candle seems to be quashed for long periods, as well. I only hope those gutsy ones in the mainstream climate community, the brilliant “citizen scientists” who are so much fun to watch running circles around the bloviating Michael Manns, and others — scientists, journalists, statesmen — win, in my lifetime.
After the firing squad, I won’t be able to help much. ….Lady in Red
bushbunny says:
August 7, 2013 at 6:19 pm
You remember that saying “‘Tis better to say nothing and be thought an idiot, than say something and everyone knows you are an idiot..” something like that.
“It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool,than to speak and remove all doubt.”
Note that the so-called progressives are now simply bought-and-paid-for puppets of high tech billionaires. The puppet running for Senate in New jersey does not even hide that his phony company is a gift to enrich him for his political efforts.
McAuliffe, no matter how slick his packaging, is nothing more than a political prostitute seeking to fleece the public.
It is no surprise Mann would choose to endorse who he has endorsed.
David Appell is in fine form tonite in the following the Daily Caller article. Makes an entertaining read.
“Charlatan” — my, my. Think he’ll sue for slander?
The Civil War should have never been fought. Let the Red Republicans (bad color choice) have the southern states. Let the Blue Democrats have the nawth. Us independents have the middle and all sides just shut the hell up and leave each other alone!
milodonharlani says:
August 7, 2013 at 7:19 pm
Lady in Red says:
August 7, 2013 at 7:08 pm
“Your vote for Perot gave us the Clintons.
Perot made a corrupt bargain with Clinton that he would get back into the race & throw it to Clinton in exchange for the government buying software from him when Hillary’s health care system was adopted. Oops! That didn’t pan out for Perot, but saddled the US with the most corrupt power couple in US history.”
This is Bull Snip, BS in capital letters! Perot, a Navy man and honorary Green Beret, wouldn’t do something like that. Besides, he pulled 38% of the Bush vote and 38% of the Clinton vote, if you done some homework you’d know that he did not affect the election outcome one bit.
Here is another problem for the Republicans. Immigration is changing demographics in the USA.
“To flip Texas in their favor, Democrats must first find a way to get millions of Hispanics who’ve never voted to the polls. Hispanics make up about 38 percent of the population in the state but cast only 22 percent of the ballots in 2012, Jones says. An estimated 2.2 million Hispanics who were eligible to vote sat out the election. “It is a problem that Democrats have been talking about for a decade and a half at least,” says James Henson, who directs the Texas Politics project at the University of Texas at Austin. “The burden is on the Democrats to demonstrate that they can do more than talk about the problem.”
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-04-11/texas-election-battleground-democrats-aim-to-mobilize-the-hispanic-vote
The British Labour Party has admitted that they approved of unfettered immigration into the UK from the poorer parts of the globe, in order for them to gain socialist votes from multiculturalism.
Here is a link that historically details a previous race change in Europe.
http://www.askelm.com/people/peo011.htm
All the best.
Has dailycaller.com been taken down? I’m unable to get a peep out of the site this morning. Did the mighty Mann ge tthem clobbered?
Those California folks who are moving to Texas could also do a lot to flip the state to the Democrats. They’re already putting up In-N-Out Burger joints all over the place. Little grey cow patties on a tiny bun and they actually make you pay for the tasteless dink. Texifornia is what it’s looking like to me lately, in some parts of the great state.
Daily Caller won’t respond at all.
So… Hispanics that register to vote get a month of free donkey burgers from In-N-Out Burger courtesy of the DNC! 🙂 Would that do it?
Gotta go to bed, maybe float off by dawn in these Missouri floodwater by Springfield/ Rolla. Ttyl
Yes it has been down for me too but now back up…
Was addressing steveta_uk
Ed Mertin, Perot is a kook who fabricated a story about N. Vietnamese commie ninjas attacking his house and promoted a conspiracy that GW Bush was going to ruin his daughter’s wedding.
And the pesky facts show that his company, EDS, was in fact going to get fat contracts from Hillarycare.
As to the story that Perot drew equally from democrats, that is another Perot lie.
Clinton would have had his head handed to him except for Perot coming out of nowhere and getting tons of free promo on CNN and other big media. Now where have we seen that happen over the past few years?
Maybe John Corzine could be the financial advisor. What a bunch of unaccountable crony crooks – no wonder Mann is making an endorsement.
Michael Jankowski says:
August 7, 2013 at 4:56 pm
Lol, David Appell is over in the comments arguing that we should be in the midst of the Little Ice Age!
_________________________________
He’s also misleading people about the relative retail gasoline prices during the GWB and BHO administrations repectively.
It’s hard to keep on topic about the charlatan but both Mann and McAuliffe are an emabarassment to Virginia. I don’t have too much confidence in what’s going to happen in the Gov’nors race here because the state has been leaning more left each year. I only hope the legislatures will keep the ‘antics’ of McAuliffe in check.
I wonder if Mann has his lawyers on speed dial yet?
Tie McAuliffe to WorldCom. That alone should be enough. if Cuccinelli’s personal views on abortion become an issue, then take a leaf from Gov. Edwards’ campaign in Louisiana and make bumper stickers and poke a little fun at Cuccinelli that say “Vote for the Neaderthal. It’s important.”
More Alinksy than Pasteur. I like that.
I’m sure I read under a different post a few weeks ago the entreaty to argue the science, not the man. Or did I dream it?
Ed Mertin says:
August 8, 2013 at 12:48 am
Clearly it is you who need to do your homework.
I know that the megalomaniac Perot got out of the Navy as soon as he could to go into business, & that he had a long-standing grudge against the elder Bush.
It’s ludicrous to claim he pulled 38% of both the Bush & Clinton votes. Even simple arithmetic shows that impossible. Clinton won with 43.0% of the popular vote to 37.5% for Bush & 18.9% for Perot. According to your fuzzy math, Clinton would have won with 59.34% to 51.75% for Bush, without Perot in the race. Not even in Chicago is that possible.
If Perot had taken equally from each of the other candidates, the Clinton-Bush result would have been 52.45% to 46.95%. But Perot did not draw equally. Quite the contrary.
Actual polling data show that Perot took about twice (or more) as many votes away from Bush as from Clinton, as the latter’s operatives knew he would, which is why they made him the deal to get back in the race. The damage Perot did in the Electoral College was proportionally even greater.
Margaret Hardman says:
August 8, 2013 at 8:01 am
I’m sure I read under a different post a few weeks ago the entreaty to argue the science, not the man. Or did I dream it?
Perhaps you dreamed that he had any science to argue with to begin with.
Margaret Hardman says:
August 8, 2013 at 8:01 am
Mann has no science to argue, so has resorted to ad hominem attacks from the git-go, as in questioning in knee-jerk fashion the “funding” of real scientists who raise unanswerable scientific objections to his religious dogma & trying to shut them up with law suits. Were the science on his side, then these illogical & intimidating tactics wouldn’t be needed.
Without Perot in the race from the beginning to attack Bush from “right” the whole tenor of the race would have been different. It would have been Bush over Clinton in a laugher. IIRC late in the race Bush was recovering momentum in the polls when Special prosecutor Lawrence Walsh very strategically indicted a bunch of Bush’s guys like Cap Weinberger on Iran-Contra garbage.
Just a thought for those supporting the “lesser of two evils” approach (i.e. vote for the R because he’s better than the D, even if he’s not the best):
How’s that working for you?
As for the main topic here: I’m wondering if Mann will sue on this one. Certainly, directly and blatantly being called a “charlatan” is far more actionable (and has much better basis) than his complaint with the National Review.
Could be fun to watch. Truth is an absolute defense – can Daily Caller prove Mann is a charlatan?
The Cooch has been all over Mann:
http://turble.blogspot.com/2011/01/yes-virginia-climate-cover-up-sott.html
Bruce, Milodonharli
Of course that’s a pat way of saying I deny your reality and substitute my own. Solipsistic, isn’t it? Did you not spot the dissimulation from what I quoted?
Justa Joe says:
August 8, 2013 at 9:42 am
You recall correctly. And in Dec 1992, a federal judge threw out the indictment. Clinton was going to win by hook AND by crook.
Lady in Red says:
August 7, 2013 at 7:28 pm
Some Republican (& a few Democrat) candidates do “want to force women to (give?) birth against their will”. The lame-brained losers Akin & Mourdock, for instance. Cuccinelli may or may not be of their ilk, but in any case is unlikely to blunder so idiotically. As with most Americans, however, the majority of GOP candidates recognize that girls & women usually make up their minds rapidly, as soon as they find out they have an unwanted pregnancy. In rare instances a prospective mother might not discover until her third trimester that she’s pregnant, but by then giving birth is less dangerous to her than an abortion.
I’d agree that most Republicans & most Americans “just don’t want an innocent little fetus to suffer pain, etc”. As a premie myself, I can sympathize. At some point, a viable fetus should be accorded its human right to life, enshrined in the Declaration of Independence. Most people oppose infanticide, such as occurs in big city abortion mills & hospitals. IMO states should be able to write their own murder statutes. MA might well want to allow infanticide, while MS prohibit all abortions, with MI somewhere in between. Were I a state legislator, I’d vote for five months rather than six months, both because more & more babies are viable at five months & because it Solomonically splits the difference, but on the right to chose side rather than right to life. In any case, as noted, most women make arrangements for abortions long before five months.
Democrat columnist Kirsten Powers describes a former abortion doctor’s testimony as to partial birth abortion procedures:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/08/08/on-abortion-wendy-davis-doesn-t-know-what-she-s-talking-about.html
FWIW, I’m an Independent, although it has been a long time since I’ve voted Democrat.
Margaret Hardman says:
August 8, 2013 at 11:38 am
If the issue is attacking the person rather than the science, then the first person to whom you should address your question is Mann. Skeptics would love to debate the science with the fraudulent charlatan, but he refuses to do so, because he knows he would lose. Therefore, his only option is to engage in usually baseless ad hominem attacks.
Why should skeptics unilaterally disarm in such a mud-slinging fight, started by their opponents, especially when it’s so much fun & so easy to ridicule a hoaxing huckster like Mann?
TonyG says:
August 8, 2013 at 9:52 am
Yes, the Daily Caller can easily prove in court that Mann is a charlatan. All they need is a blow-up of the Hockey Stick graph to do so, by which his “Nature trick to hide the decline” would be blatantly laid bare.
“Charlatan” may in fact be an easier case to prove than “molester”, where the issue might be whether the alleged slur (or accurate description) was meant figuratively or literally.
“Tenured Prof Retires His ‘Boomer Butt,’ Leaves ‘Authoritarian Hellhole’ of Penn State.”
http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2013/08/tenured-prof.html
“While I have been fortunate in my set of departmental colleagues at Penn State, the institution as a whole is phenomenally weird, following a North Korean governance model without the transparency [6], and with an Office of Sponsored Programs—OSP, the Office for the Suppression of Productivity—that has the tapeworm as their mascot. In discussing my decision to leave with a colleague who is an ardent supporter of the system, I referred to PSU as “an authoritarian hellhole,” which elicited the reply “Well, it is that…” [12] Suffice it to say that the serial pedophile Jerry Sandusky found a welcoming and protective environment at Penn State not out of luck, but rather as an all-but-inevitable consequence of the institutional culture.”
Lady in Red:
With all respect, what did an innocent baby do to deserve getting killed?
Does a baby deserve to die just because it is inconvenient?
Does a baby deserve to die because one person couldn’t keep her knees together, and the other couldn’t keep his pants zipped?
If you want to dance to the music, you should be prepared to pay the piper. Anything other than that is pure selfishness.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/07/14/McAuliffe-Founded-Company-Long-After-It-Existed
“But the whole story is falling apart on examination, beginning with the fact that McAuliffe didn’t “found” GreenTech. Michael Patrick Leahy did the legwork to track down the whole history. The GreenTech project was founded in 2008 under the name Hybrid Kinetics by Benjamin Yeung, an exiled Chinese businessman known for, er, questionable business practices, and his partner Charles Wang. The company was originally started in Alabama, with lavish promises to bring a giant, multi-billion-dollar factory to an impoverished part of the state. Wang then started a Mississippi branch of Hybrid Kinetics, presumably with the idea of shopping around for additional subsidies in a different state. When Yeung and Wang’s partnership fell apart, Wang changed the name of Hybrid Kinetics to GreenTech, but kept the same basic business plan, in competition with Yeung’s Alabama version (which we will return to in a moment).
In December 2008, Hybrid Kinetics paid former president Clinton $300,000 to give a speech, putting its principals in contact with Clinton’s political circle, of which McAuliffe is a very prominent member. By the following June, McAuliffe had flunked out of the Virginia Democratic primary and was casting about for outside-the-beltway credentials. In August, Wang incorporated GreenTech in Mississippi as the new name for Hybrid Kinetics. In October, McAuliffe “founded” GreenTech as a Virginia corporation, and the following March Wang merged his Mississippi version into McAuliffe’s Virginia version. So if you’re keeping track of the shell game, what you really have is a company founded by Chinese businessmen in Alabama in 2008—being “founded” by Terry McAuliffe in Virginia about two years later. The name is changed and the headquarters have been moved, but under the hood it’s the same entity.
Why would a Chinese businessman go through so much trouble to select a politically connected front man?”
Lady in Red says:
“I cannot abide *his feeling* that [Cuccinelli] has the right to force all women at all times to birth…” “…forced incubating ovens…”&blah, blah, etc.
I see that Lady in Red has caved in to an emotional extreme. If the typical female voter is affected in the same emo way, then Cuccinelli will have a hard time.
Voting based on ‘feeling’ — and projecting her own ‘feelings’ onto someone else, no less — is why the country is in such sad shape. Does she really believe what she wrote? Really? That Cuccinelli is going to force all women to give birth??
The Dems have tapped into “feelings” pretty effectively, as the emotional Lady in Red demonstrates. Facts and laws mean nothing to voters like that. “Feelings” are everything. And if you can project your own feelings onto the good guy, then so much the better for those who have made the country what it is today. Thanks a lot, L-I-R, for putting your feelings and emotions above rational thought.
I am a mean machine, Mr. Stealey. I don’t play with dummies. These folk are going for all the marbles…. today, tomorrow, ….in ten years? All the marbles.
They are smarter than the Social Nationalists running our government, present bureaucrats, etc now..
This is the American Taliban and, my twitching elbow says, there will be a holy war with Islam, soon.
I don’t like any of it. ….Lady in Red
Lady in Red says:
“These folk are going for all the marbles”
Who might you be referring to?
Hell’s bells. It’s getting late. Truth is a lie and lies are truth. Climate science is not the only venue.
Try this:
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2013/08/07/the-fraud-that-is-cnn-through-the-lies-within-the-truth-about-benghazi-updating-the-previous-expose/
Exhale, get a beer and watch the remarkable interview with Amber Lyon.
Climate science was not my first experience with intellectual dissonance. …Lady in Red
Huh?
Was that a response to my question?
Who, exactly, is ‘going for all the marbles’? That’s all I was asking.
[If your reply was to someone/something else, please disregard this comment.]
I mucked up: The Amber Lyon interview is here:
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2013/08/07/cnn-airs-the-truth-about-benghazi-but-fills-the-story-with-lies-and-deception-we-explain-why/
(…on InfoWars…. with Alex Jones…sigh. Just watch. sigh….)
The link, in the message above, is too hard for a first sky jump. ….Lady in Red
…but, why would anyone call Mann a charlatan?
Because it’s more polite than calling him a cranky crank, or adding the honorific, “Piltdownn”.
IANAL but this case (which was dismissed before trial) might be brought to the attention of NR/Steyn’s lawyers, since it may not come up for them in a search of precedents since it did not go to trial. (Can a “case dismissed” be a kind of negative precedent in libel law?? Anyone know??)
So the original creator of DOS, Tim Patterson, was basically accused (many years later) of copying or plagiarism. He sued for libel and defamation, but the case was dismissed before trial because the judge deemed him to be a “limited purpose public figure” (although Paterson has always been far more obscure to the public and news media than is Michael Mann):
http://dosmandrivel.blogspot.com/2007/08/is-dos-rip-off-of-cpm.html
Just something I noticed in reading up on the origins of the PC, not on any climate issue. But this might be of interest to lawyers and journalists trying to judge whether Mann is any kind of “public figure” and whether that should bear upon the legal proceedings.
P.s. Nothing against Tim Patterson, who seems like a good guy, and whose explanation of the origins of DOS seems plausible to me….. I simply mention the case as an example of the high hurdle faced by even a “limited purpose public figure” under US defamation law, unless the DC political correctness mafia rules again.